being a postboy and rider employed in the business of the postoffice, that is to say, in carrying letters and packets from Kidderminster to Stourbridge, in the business of his said employment. And that the said Henry Ellins afterwards on, &c., at, &c., being then and there such person so employed as aforesaid, and then and there having the said letter, containing the said bank post bill, bills of exchange, and promissory note in the hands and possession of him the said Henry Ellins as such person so employed as aforesaid, feloniously did steal and take from and out of the said letter the said bank post bill, bills of exchange, promissory note," &c.

No evidence was given that the letter contained the bill of exchange for the 100l. The other securities were produced, but no evidence given of their execution. The contractor for conveying the letters from Worcester to Birmingham through Kidderminster proved that he had employed the prisoner as a post-boy to carry the mail from Kidderminster to Stourbridge, but not as a rider. But it appeared in evidence that he carried the mail on horseback.

It was objected for the prisoner that the prosecutor had failed in the proof of the indictment.

First, Because the letter was described as a letter containing (inter alia) a bill of exchange for 100l. which it was not proved to contain.

Secondly, Because the prisoner was described as a post-boy and rider, and proved to be only a post-boy.

These objections being overruled, the prisoner was found guilty.

This case was reserved for the opinion of THE JUDGES to determine whether the conviction was proper after the above objections taken by the prisoner; and it was also submitted on behalf of the prisoner, whether there should not have been due proof of the execution of the securities contained in the letter. LAWRENCE J. referred to Shaw's Case, 1 Leach, C. C. 79. S. C. 2 Bla. 789. 2 East P. C. 580, where the prisoner, being described in two counts as a person employed in sorting and charging letters, was acquitted on those counts, it being proved he was employed in sorting only.

In Michaelmas term, 10th of November, 1810, at a meeting of ALL THE JUDGES they were of opinion, that as to the first objection, the statement in the indictment was not descriptive of

1810.

ELLINS' Case.

1810.

ELLINS' Case.

the letter, but of the offence, which was stealing a bill out of a letter containing any bill, note, &c.

Secondly, That a post-boy riding on horseback was a rider as well as a post-boy.

Thirdly, That it was not necessary to prove the execution of the securities against a spoliator or wrong-doer.

THE JUDGES were unanimously of opinion that the conviction was right.

1811.

REX v. WILLIAM HUMPHRY HILL.

dictment for

Upon an in- THE prisoner was tried before Mr. JUSTICE CHAMBRE, at the Taunton Lent assizes, in the year 1811, upon an indictment under the 30th G. 2. c.24. (a) for obtaining promissory notes and money by false pretences.

obtaining money under false pretences, it is not necessary to prove the whole of the pretence charged, proof of part of the pretence and

that the money was ob

There were six counts in the indictment, of which the first was abandoned.

The second count after stating a discourse between Benjamin Browning and Richard Parker, described to have been severally seamen in the king's navy, and discharged from the service, and the prisoner about pensions, to which Browning and Parker as such seamen were supposed to be respectively entitled, and about Bank notes are an application by letter supposed to have been made for such

tained by such

part is suffici

ent.

not money,

goods, wares, &c. within the 30 G. 2. c. 24. But see note (b) post, 195.

(a) By the first section, it is enacted, That all persons who knowingly and designedly, by false pretence or pretences, shall obtain from any person or persons, money, goods, wares, or merchandise, with intent to cheat or defraud any person or persons of the same, shall be deemed offenders against law and the public peace; and the court before whom any such offender or offenders shall be tried, shall, in case they shall be convicted of the said offence, order such offender or offenders to be fined and imprisoned, or to be put in the pillory, or publicly whipped, or to be transported for the term of seven years, as the court in which any such offender or offenders shall be convicted shall think fit and order.

pensions by the prisoner, set out the false pretences alleged to have been made by the prisoner to Browning and Parker which were, that he, the prisoner, had received an answer to his said letter of application, and produced a paper as such answer, and pretended to them that two guineas must be sent up to the under clerks as fees, which they always expected, and that nothing could be done without it. The indictment went on to state, that by these pretences the prisoner obtained from Browning on behalf of himself and Parker two promissory notes for 17. each, and two shillings in money, Browning's property, with intent, &c.

The third count contained no material variation from the second, except that it stated the discourse to have been between the prisoner and Browning only, but relating to the respective pensions of Browning and Parker, and stating the sum required to be sent up for fees to be one guinea from each.

The fourth count stated a discourse between the prisoner and John Bennett (another discharged seaman) respecting the pension he was supposed to be entitled to, an offer by the prisoner to apply on his behalf for it, and write a letter for the purpose; and that he falsely pretended that a pound note must be sent up by Bennett as a fee to the head clerk, and that nothing could be done without it. By which false pretence he obtained of Bennett a note for one pound, his property, with intent to defraud him.

The fifth count stated a discourse between the prisoner and Browning concerning the pensions of which the said Browning, Parker, and Bennett (the three discharged seamen) were supposed to be entitled to, and concerning a supposed letter written by the prisoner and the supposed answer to it; and then stated the false pretences made by the prisoner to Browning to be, that the pri soner had heard from his friend (the head clerk) and that they (the three seamen) must send him (the supposed head clerk) a guinea for writing letters; and that the head clerk had informed him that they were to have six years' back pay. By which the prisoner obtained from Browning another promissory note for one pound, and another shilling in money, his property.

The sixth count alleged the prisoner's discourse to be with all the three persons, and that the prisoner produced another letter which he falsely pretended to have received from his friend, informing him that the pensions were allowed and every thing settled, but that the pensioners must either go to London to be passed

1811.

HILL'S Case.

1811.

HILL'S Case.

or his (the prisoner's) going, would be quite as well and have the same effect, if they would pay his expences. Whereby he fraudulently obtained from Browning another promissory note for one pound, and twelve shillings in money, being his note, chattels, and monies, and from Bennett ten shillings of his money, with intent to defraud them respectively.

At the close of the evidence several objections were taken by the prisoner's counsel.

One of these objections, applying to all the counts but the fourth, was that Parker (who died before the trial) was not proved to have been a discharged seaman as alleged.

In fact, there was no direct evidence of a discharge, but Browning in his evidence described Parker as having been his shipmate, and proved that the prisoner acted or pretended to act under Parker's employment as such discharged seaman; that at the time of the transaction Parker was resident at Bath, and that the prisoner at one time expressed doubts whether he should succeed in getting Parker's pension, because he had not obtained a certificate of his discharge.

Another objection applying to the second, third, and fourth counts was, that as the pretences were necessary to be specifically stated in the indictment, they should be proved precisely as stated, and that the representation in the second and third counts, "that the clerks always expected fees," and the further statement in those counts, as also in the fourth," that nothing could be done without it," were not proved, as in fact they

were not.

Another objection was also made to the indictment, that it did not bring the case within the statute, inasmuch as promissory notes being merely choses in action, they could not be considered as money, goods, wares, or merchandizes, which are the words of description in the statute.

But if this were a good objection, which the learned JUDGE thought it was not, it could only go to the fourth count, all the others charging the obtaining money as well as notes.

Another objection to the evidence on the fourth count was, that Bennett proved that the prisoner's pretence was that a guinea and not a pound note, as was alleged in that count, 'must be sent up to the head clerk.

Bennett's evidence was, that although the prisoner at first pre

tended that a guinea was necessary to be sent, yet he took a note for one pound for the purpose.

The case in all other particulars was satisfactorily proved, and the objections being overruled, the jury found the prisoner guilty, and he received sentence; but the learned JUDGE reserved the consideration of the objections for THE JUDGES, that the prisoner might have the benefit of a recommendation for a pardon if they should be of opinion that the objections affected all the counts in the indictment so as to have entitled the prisoner to an acquittal.

In Easter term, 1811, at a meeting of ALL THE JUDGES (except LORD ELLENBOROUGH, THOMSON B., and LE BLANC J.) the conviction was held right (a) on all the counts but the fourth; the fourth count was held bad, because THE JUDGES thought bank notes were not money, goods, &c. within the act. (b)

REX v. RICHARDS.

1811.

THE prisoner was tried before Mr. JUSTICE HEATH, at the The prisoner Maidstone Lent assizes, in the year 1811, on an indictment containing with other counts, a count for forging and another count for uttering knowing to be forged an order for the payment of money in the words, cyphers, and figures following:

"Rate gun brig.

"£.14. 9. 6.

drew a bill upon the Trea.. surer of the Navy payable to blank or 01der, and signed it in the name of a navy sur

"Entered 10th Feb. 1810.

geon.

Held

that to constitute an order for payment of money there must be some payee; a direction to pay to blank or order is not suffici

ent. See post Rexv.Randall,

(a) Vide Rex v. Story, supra, 81. and Rex v. Major, 2 East, P.C. 1118. (b) The 52 G.3. c. 64. extends the 30 G. 2. c. 24. to persons obtaining, by false pretences, any bond, bill, note, security, warrant, &c. or other valuable thing.

p. 195.